The Lie Crumbles - Evolution

[thomasleonard]

There is no evidence to prove or disprove evolution. However this should not sway your faith, it should reinforce it. Everything science throws at us, is actually giving to us.
Never lose your faith due to science, because science is based on theories, ideas and predictions. There is never solid evidence.
The universe is too complex for us to understand. There are many things that we have not understood. Only god knows, because he created all.
Its just amazing really, the complexity of life we cannot even comprehend the statistical structure of it. Our brains are too primitive to acknowledge it.
Just sit there and think to yourself. Imagine how powerful and complex god really is. He works in strange and awe inspiring ways.
Ways that are limited to us but unlimited to him.
Even the brightest minds on this earth, cannot disprove him.
Even the brightest minds on this earth cannot exclude him.
What does that say.
But god is so much more knowledgeable. For we are living in his own world he created.
Never doubt god, never doubt christ.
They exist in gods kingdom.
Be ready to be judged.
but be ready to love.
love thy neighbour.
Treat all equal.
Do not judge.
overall do not sin.
God bless everyone.

 

[UppsalaDragby]

I don't think you understood the point. If your basis for concluding something is true is "people carved figurines" or "people drew pictures", then by the same token we must conclude that fairies, elves, minotaurs, griffins, and a host of other such creatures existed alongside humans.

I mean, if your standard of evidence for "people coexisted with dinosaurs" is some drawings and/or figurines....well, that seems like a pretty low standard of evidence to me.

Sorry to butt in River, but Bronzesnake already addressed your totally unsupported argument that these kinds of mythical entities had the "same level of evidence" as dragons. If you can show the members of this forum where ...

1. "fairies, elves, minotaurs, griffins, and a host of other such creatures" have corresponding representatives in the fossil record,

2. where they are described in accounts in practically every culture in the world, or

3. have been described in detail by witnesses who were not typically "fable-writers", such as Marco Polo, and

4. who are depicted as one among exclusively existing animals, such as in the Chinese zodiac, where you have the rat, the dog, the oxe, the pig, the rooster, the monkey, the sheep, the horse, the snake and others...

then perhaps you have a point.

So be my guest and state your case... if you have one.....

 

[River Jordan]

Again, if this is the best evidence the fundamentalists have for the coexistence of humans and dinos, that pretty much speaks for itself.

 

[UppsalaDragby]

I asked you to share your case, not a prejudiced attitude that considers everything that agrees to popular consensus is the "best evidence".

So what case are you presenting, other than an appeal to popularity?

 

[This Vale Of Tears]

Again, if this is the best evidence the fundamentalists have for the coexistence of humans and dinos, that pretty much speaks for itself.

As I pointed out with my first response, young earth creationism isn't the only viewpoint opposing the lies of evolution. I think to bury one's head in the Bible and ignore what science has to reveal about the history of this planet is just foolish. I do enjoy Hank Hennagraff's criticism's of the claims of young earth creationists, particularly the sketchy "evidence" they come up with of dinosaurs and humans cohabitating, evidence that gets debunked thoroughly, but is still spread around even after being revealed. This makes Christians look like nutcases which is why I implored, "Just stop!"

 

[River Jordan]

I asked you to share your case, not a prejudiced attitude that considers everything that agrees to popular consensus is the "best evidence".

So what case are you presenting, other than an appeal to popularity?

My case for what?

 

[aspen]

Dont YECs see how you are adding to the gospel by demanding that people embrace your narrow view of creation? you guys are marrying salvation with a literal interpretation of the two Genesis accounts! Jesus did not ask people to deny what was before their eyes (in this case, scientific evidence and the obvious literary nature of the Genesis chapters dealing with creation); instead He illustrated He love through tangiable action - service and miracles. Yet, people still chose to reject what they saw with their own eyes - please stop asking people to do the same. This is really all Jordan , Vale (Valley?) and I are saying.

 

[River Jordan]

As I pointed out with my first response, young earth creationism isn't the only viewpoint opposing the lies of evolution. I think to bury one's head in the Bible and ignore what science has to reveal about the history of this planet is just foolish. I do enjoy Hank Hennagraff's criticism's of the claims of young earth creationists, particularly the sketchy "evidence" they come up with of dinosaurs and humans cohabitating, evidence that gets debunked thoroughly, but is still spread around even after being revealed. This makes Christians look like nutcases which is why I implored, "Just stop!"

Then you should try and convince them of your view directly rather than posting your views to me.

 

[Bronzesnake]

Dont YECs see how you are adding to the gospel by demanding that people embrace your narrow view of creation?

[SIZE=14pt]Don't theistic evolutionists see how you are adding to the gospel by demanding that people embrace your narrow view of creation? [/SIZE]

[SIZE=14pt]Actually, I would be on stronger ground in relation to your accusation of us adding to the gospel.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=14pt]I add nothing, when God says..... [/SIZE]

[SIZE=14pt]1 [/SIZE][SIZE=14pt]In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.[/SIZE][SIZE=14pt] 2 [/SIZE]Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.
[SIZE=14pt]3 [/SIZE][SIZE=14pt]And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light.[/SIZE][SIZE=14pt] 4 [/SIZE]God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.

[SIZE=14pt]OK, I take God's own word literally. Any child could tell you God created "light" and it took one day. I add nothing, and I take away nothing. If I were to believe in theistic evolution, I would have to ADD words to what God actually says here. So, it's not YEC who add or take away, it's evolutionists. Unless you can show me any scripture which actually says "millions" or "billions"[/SIZE]

[SIZE=14pt]6 [/SIZE][SIZE=14pt]And God said, “Let there be a vault between the waters to separate water from water.”[/SIZE][SIZE=14pt] 7 [/SIZE]So God made the vault and separated the water under the vault from the water above it. And it was so. 8 God called the vault “sky.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day.

[SIZE=14pt]Again, God said it took a day. You have to add "millions" or "billions" to change what God actually says.[/SIZE]


[SIZE=14pt]9 [/SIZE][SIZE=14pt]And God said, “Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear.” And it was so.[/SIZE][SIZE=14pt] 10 [/SIZE]God called the dry ground “land,” and the gathered waters he called “seas.” And God saw that it was good.
[SIZE=14pt]11 [/SIZE][SIZE=14pt]Then God said, “Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds.” And it was so.[/SIZE][SIZE=14pt] 12 [/SIZE]The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good. 13 And there was evening, and there was morning—the third day.

[SIZE=14pt]God says it took one day. You have to add "millions" or "billions"[/SIZE]

[SIZE=14pt]Jesus did not ask people to deny what was before their eyes (in this case, scientific evidence and the obvious literary nature of the Genesis[/SIZE] chapters dealing with creation);

[SIZE=14pt]I agree, Jesus did not ask people to deny what was before their eyes.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=14pt]Look and see -[/SIZE]

[SIZE=14pt]3http://biblehub.com/matthew/19-3.htm[/SIZE][SIZE=14pt]The Pharisees also came unto him, tempting him, and saying unto him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause? 4[/SIZE]And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,
[SIZE=14pt] [/SIZE]
[SIZE=14pt]There you go. Jesus Christ Himself says that man - Adam and Eve, were created in the BEGINING. Not millions, or billions of years after the beginning.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=14pt] [/SIZE]
[SIZE=14pt]Now, if you think any scientists, or evolutionists is smarter than Jesus, then you're in deep trouble.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=14pt]The only way to make these specific words Jesus Himself said, you will be forced to ADD or TAKE AWAY to make it fit with your own interpretation.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=14pt]instead He illustrated He love through tangiable action - service and miracles[/SIZE].

[SIZE=14pt] [/SIZE]
[SIZE=14pt]OK, you have to be consistent if your mistaken understanding of God's creation is it fit.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=14pt]You place your faith in "science" you can't take God's literal six day creation, because it goes against science right? That's what you say.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=14pt]So, go ask one of those brilliant scientists if miracles are real, and stay consistent with your "science" based reality. Any scientists will tell you there are no such things as miracles, and so you are left with a Godless creation.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=14pt]Also ask any scientists if God is real, then stick to your scientific faith. Science does not confirm God, it rejects God.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=14pt] [/SIZE]

[SIZE=14pt]"Yet, people still chose to reject what they saw with their own eyes - please stop asking people to do the same. This is really all Jordan , Vale (Valley?) and I are saying."[/SIZE]

[SIZE=14pt] [/SIZE]
[SIZE=14pt]What? What does that even mean? "you people still chose to reject what they saw with their own eyes" ? Sorry, that makes no sense at all. Are you saying someone saw God create everything with their own eyes? Could you please clarify?[/SIZE]
[SIZE=14pt] [/SIZE]

[SIZE=14pt]you guys are marrying salvation with a literal interpretation of the two Genesis accounts! Jesus did not ask people to deny what was before their eyes (in this case, scientific evidence and the obvious literary nature of the Genesis chapters dealing with creation); instead He illustrated He love through tangiable action - service and miracles. Yet, people still chose to reject what they saw with their own eyes - please stop asking people to do the same. This is really all Jordan , Vale (Valley?) and I are saying.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=14pt]"obvious"? any English teacher will tell you the genesis account of creation is in literal language. There is zero figurative language used there is zero parable used. So, what you are actually saying is that -"God must have been mistaken. Didn't God listen to the scientists"?[/SIZE]

[SIZE=14pt]Again - you are basing your argument on science. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=14pt] [/SIZE]
[SIZE=14pt]This is where theistic evolutionists are hypocritical. You use "science" to "prove" Genesis is allegorical, even though any English teacher will tell you is totally wrong.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=14pt]You arbitrarily pick out any verse, or chapter, or doctrine which are diametrically opposed to your scientifically based theology, and simply state "oh, this is allegory" That's ridiculous![/SIZE]
[SIZE=14pt]You limit the Word, and power of God to a scientific scale, and are therefore forced to add millions and billions of years into the text. If you can show me a single literal scripture which says millions or billions, I will concede to you brilliance![/SIZE]
[SIZE=14pt]It is NOT to be found ANYWHERE in the entire bible, and yet, you accuse literal bible believers of adding to the text??? Really? I would say you are the ones doing the adding.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=14pt] [/SIZE]
[SIZE=14pt]Be honest, be consistent, the same science that you have placed so much faith in, also tells us there is no such thing as God! No such thing as miracles! Be consistent.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=14pt] [/SIZE]
[SIZE=14pt]John[/SIZE]
[SIZE=14pt] [/SIZE]
[SIZE=14pt] [/SIZE]
[SIZE=14pt] [/SIZE]
[SIZE=14pt] [/SIZE]

 

[aspen]

John - did I hit a nerve?

I could careless if you decide to take the creation story in Genesis literally or not. In fact you could follow any wild configuration you want.....your salvation has nothing to do with it. That should be good news! Our salvation is found in Christ, not our interpretation of scripture. This is where you are adding to scripture - you are demanding Christians adopt a literal interpretation of scripture in order to be considered a legitimate follower of Christ and therefore available for the gift of salvation - I am not demanding that you conform to evolution or ID or literalism - GET IT?

 

[Bronzesnake]

Hello RJ

Again, if this is the best evidence the fundamentalists have for the coexistence of humans and dinos, that pretty much speaks for itself.

Theistic evolutionist seem to think the name "fundamentalist" is an insult. I wear that label with pride. YES, I understand the Bible LITERALLY, and that is exactly how God wants it to be.
Some of the most dangerous cults, were successful in drawing seemingly intelligent people into their web, by allegorizing the scriptures. This way, they could control their "flock" and their members could never know what the bible actually means, because they are spoon fed lies, and evil intentions all based on a "leaders" specific understanding of God.
I don't need to give examples, we have all seen the evil and tragic outcomes when this happens.

Of course, I'm not suggesting everyone who is not a fundie, is evil. I'm saying, God would have no justification to judge anyone, based on a Bible full of allegory, because if this were the case, ten people would give ten different meanings to the same scripture. That can only lead to confusion, and also, it opens the door to allow people to live any sinful lifestyle they choose, because hey, when God says adulterers go to Hell. Well, unrepentant adulterers. Just to be clear - It doesn't matter what you may have done, God will forgive and forget the sins, once you come to Jesus with an honest heart of repentance.

OK, as for the "best evidence"
There is a major problem which we must address if we hope to prove, or corroborate our personal positions in relation to this topic of creation vs. evolution -
time. When we try to present evidence from the distant past, we very quickly run into brick walls.
Creationists can't present the kind of "proof" that will satisfy evolutionists, or, theistic evolutionists.
Also, evolutionists and theistic evolutionists cannot present "proof" that will satisfy creationists. This is because each side has their heels dug in, and will not be moved unless they see some overwhelming, unattainable evidence, which has to be strong enough to push them back to a place where they can possibly cause themselves to reconsider their dug in positions.

In the end, we are forced to admit each side must have "faith" in their beliefs/religions.

There are zero examples on the planet which shows a series of transitional fossils, where life-form A) eventually becomes life-form B)
Some of the most respected evolution scientists admit, there are no examples anywhere to be found!

A senior evolutionary paleontologist at the British Museum of Natural History, Colin Patterson has also made some surprising statements about transitional fossils:

“Gould and the American Museum people are hard to contradict when they say there are no transitional fossils. . . . I will lay it on the line — there is not one such fossil for which one could make a watertight argument. . . . It is easy to make up stories of how one form gave rise to another. . . . But such stories are not part of science, for there is no way of putting them to the test.”

There we have it. A highly respected senior evolutionary paleontologist tells it like it is!
There are more similar examples -

Lord Solly Zuckerman, for many years the head of the department of anatomy at the University of Birmingham and chief scientific adviser to the British government, was knighted in 1964, awarded the Order of Merit in 1968, and elevated to a life peerage in 1971 in recognition of his distinguished career as a research scientist. After more than 15 years of research on the subject, with a team that rarely included less than four scientists, Lord Zuckerman concluded that Australopithecus did not walk upright, and was not intermediate between ape and man, but was merely an anthropoid ape. Lord Zuckerman, although not a creationist, believed there was very little, if any, science in the search for man’s fossil ancestry. Lord Zuckerman has written, based on a lifetime of investigation, that if man has evolved from an ape-like creature, he seemed to do so without leaving any trace of the transformation in the fossil record


The best examples of man's ancestry in the fossil record, come crashing down around the evolutionmsist feet!
There's more!

Evolutionist Dr. Charles Oxnard (professor of anatomy and human biology at the University of Western Australia) completed one of the most sophisticated computer analyses of australopithecine fossils ever undertaken, and concluded that they have nothing to do with the ancestry of man, and are simply an extinct form of ape. “It is now recognized widely that the australopithecines are not structurally closely similar to humans.” Moreover, the world-renowned Richard Leakey has stated, “Biologists would dearly like to know how modern apes, modern humans, and the various ancestral hominids have evolved from a common ancestor. Unfortunately, the fossil record is somewhat incomplete as far as the hominids are concerned, and it is all but blank for the apes. . . . David Pilbeam (a well-known expert in human evolution) comments wryly, ‘If you brought in a smart scientist from another discipline and showed him the meager evidence we’ve got he’d surely say, ‘forget it: there isn’t enough to go on.


this is not negative brothers. Now you can shed the shackles of evolution, this demonic lie to reduce God's own Words to lies. Now you can fight side by side with Jesus, and you can feel right in your mind that God actually gave us His Word, as He wanted it to be - Literal! What kind of God could create the entire universe, and yet, somehow getting His Word to us exactly as He wanted it to appear, seems impossible, and so we are forced to rely on the science of fallible humans?

The evidence is in brothers! There has been a powerful effort to dig up evidence to "prove" God's Word is not to be taken seriously. Now after a century and a half, there is not a single example of a series of graduated, transitional fossils to be found. How much more proof do we need brothers? Look, we gave Darwin his chance, and he failed miserably. The game is coming to a close brothers and sisters, let's get good with God before it's too late.

Take another careful look at Genesis and see it for what it is! A literal, day by day view of God's ultimate power. Science cannot compete with God brothers, although our mortal enemy wants us to believe it. Come back to God, in His entire glory brothers. He would never send us a convoluted message, which would lead to confusion and in fighting among us. He makes His word easy to understand. So that everyone can have a personal relationship with Gosd, and not just the elite few who can interpret what God "really" meant to say.

can keep going, to drive the truth home. Evolution is a dead hypothesis. It is on it's last gasping breaths and scientists are abandoning ship, more and more each day! I


A startling statement

by Professor Louis Bounoure declared, “Evolution is a fairy tale for grown-ups. This theory has helped nothing in the progress of science. It is useless.”Bounoure was former president of the Biological Society of Strasbourg and director of the Strasbourg Zoological Museum, and later Director of Research at the French National Center of Scientific Research.

As far as genetic evolution goes, we have serious, devastating truth which proves Darwinian evolution is Impossible!

Dr. Ian Macreadie, winner of several scientific awards for outstanding contributions to molecular biological research, affirms that “all you see in the lab is either gene duplications, reshuffling of existing genes, or defective genes (with a loss of information). . . . But you never see any new information arising in a cell . . . we just don’t observe it happening. It’s hard to see how any serious scientist could believe that real information can arise just by itself, from nothing.”

It’s not surprising that one of the most well-known evolutionists openly criticized the traditional neo-Darwinian theory of evolution. On the faculties of Harvard and New York University, the late Stephen Jay Gould was the author of over 15 books on scientific topics and contributed monthly essays to the periodical Natural History since January 1974. His essays have also appeared in other scientific periodicals and his work can be found quoted in educational textbooks at all levels.He wrote that although he had been “beguiled” by the unifying power of neo-Darwinism when he studied it as a graduate student in the 1960s, the weight of the evidence pushed him to the reluctant conclusion that neo-Darwinism “as a general proposition, is effectively dead, despite its persistence as textbook orthodoxy.”

I can keep this up all day, but I truly hope there are some here, even just one, who sees evolution for what it really is - an attack on the authority of God Himself. God was wrong - God didn't mean it - God created through evolution, over billions of years!
Evolution is a doctrine of demons. I chose to believe my God. I chose to be Fundamentalists, I choose to accept literal language when I see it.

OK, as for the `dinosaur figurines!
If you choose to be blind to reality, I can't help you.
Do we actually believe that tens of thousands of artifacts dug up in different locations, including underneath a police chief's own house, were "planted" there, in the hopes that they would be dug up, and then what? Whoever made these creations, could never collect any payment from any of them! How come no one noticed what had to be a large operation, with hundreds of helpers: Why didn't any one see loads and loads of wood being imported to keep the kilns going? Are we just prejudiced against these "lying" Mexican people?

Fact - several pieces were sent to be carbon dated. Fact - dates all came back over 2,000 years. Fact - when the labs found out the samples came from dinosaur figurines, they suddenly admitted they were horribly wrong!
Fact - dinosaurs, such as the ones mentioned in the Bible, co-existed with humans.

There are human foot prints on top of dinosaur footprints, which should close the case, except for the extreme denial of those who cannot separate themselves from their true god -the god of man through the power of science! I choose God over science every time!

As if these examples from Mexico weren't proof enough, there are scores of dinosaurs depicted throughout the world!
Too many toist here, so I'll give you a link, so you can see for yourselves.

If you can deny all these, then I suggest to you that you are not interested in THE truth - you are interested in YOUR truth
Click here - ANCIENT DINOSAUR DEPICTIONS

John

John - did I hit a nerve?

I could careless if you decide to take the creation story in Genesis literally or not. In fact you could follow any wild configuration you want.....your salvation has nothing to do with it. That should be good news! Our salvation is found in Christ, not our interpretation of scripture. This is where you are adding to scripture - you are demanding Christians adopt a literal interpretation of scripture in order to be considered a legitimate follower of Christ and therefore available for the gift of salvation - I am not demanding that you conform to evolution or ID or literalism - GET IT?

I am demanding nothing brother.
Relax, take a deep breath. I'm not here to force anything on anyone brother.
I'm here on this "FORUM to discuss Christian topics, with respect, and calm.

So, please try not to get all worked up ok?
I'm just putting all the actual information I have, onto this forum, so others can see where I'm coming from.

So far, all I've read from you are personal attacks, and false accusations.

brother, it's ok to believe in anything you want to ok? I'm not forcing anything on anyone, including you ok?

Instead of worrying about what I believe in, why not post evidence for what you believe in.

When I post here, I try to put out as much information as I can. see the links, and quotes I posted? I wouldn't be here wasting my time worrying about what others believe.

Take care brother.

John

 

[This Vale Of Tears]

Then you should try and convince them of your view directly rather than posting your views to me.

I already have. Perhaps you weren't paying attention.

 

[aspen]

john, you are the person who responded to a message i addressed to YECs in general. Not sure how you interpret it as a personal attack.

in any case, i am glad you are a YEC who does not make it mandatory for people who want to follow Christ to also believe in a literal interpretation of the creation story. Kudos!

 

[Bronzesnake]

OK, I misread your demeanor. It seemed to be aggressive when you insisted that I was demanding people to believe as I do.

john, you are the person who responded to a message i addressed to YECs in general. Not sure how you interpret it as a personal attack.

in any case, i am glad you are a YEC who does not make it mandatory for people who want to follow Christ to also believe in a literal interpretation of the creation story. Kudos!

I can't conceive of anyone on a forum, attempting to "force" their own personal beliefs on others.
Also, whenever I make a faith statement, I always include corroboration in the form of quotes, and links.
It's very easy to take up a specific position, and simply leave it at that, without any evidence showing why you believe in something.
Simply saying "I believe in an allegorical Bible" does not add or subtract from a discussion, or debate.

Could you explain how it is that you came up with your position"
To be honest, I can't figure out precisely what it is you, and others, specifically believe in, because none of you have actually explained what you believe, and there is no corroboration from any source, such as the Bible, or, historical evidence.

I think what you and others are saying is that you believe theistic evolution...am I correct in assuming that?
I am truly interested in learning from all of you. I am being sincere, and I am not trying to belittle, or disrespect anyone.

Take care, and thank you for your honest reply. I really appreciate it.

John

I can post scientific evidence for a young earth if anyone is interested.

For example;

Creation scientists got a huge geological gift when Mount St Helens blew it's top.
Not because of any harm, or personal damage obviously. However, scientists can observe and test the causes, and effects of this massive volcanic eruption, and make a powerful case for a young earth, from studying the geological features we can see in real time - we can actually study the effects - the aftermath, of such a catastrophe.

If you look at the geological features, we can see that for example; a mini Grand Canyon was formed in under a couple of weeks! We see the exact same features, where layer after layer was put down in extremely short time. One of the most damning evidences opposed to evolution from the Grand Canyon, is the fact that the successive layers, which are supposed to represent millions upon millions of years - however, what we actually see are flat layers. How could it be, that over millions of years, there seems to be no geological features? Surely there must be at least some, rain erosion, for example? There should certainly be erosion somewhere in between these flat layers, which are supposed to represent millions of successive years. How can it be that there is zero soil in between each layer?
The successive layers, and other amazing geological features, caused by this eruption have provided an excellent once in a lifetime opportunity to study a catastrophic event in real time! The the Mount St Helens eruption is an excellent source for scientific study.

The "mini Grand Canyon" is an exact representation of what we see in the Grand Canyon, scaled down!
The aftermath of the rushing water, debris,rocks and boulders, actually rushed through a valley and cut out this mini example in a matter of weeks! If this same mini canyon was already here long before any serious scientific study was undertaken, we would see yet "more proof" for millions of years, shown in successive "flat" layers. We would be scorned yet again, for even daring to suggest the mini canyon was formed through a catastrophe, over a matter of weeks or months. We would be laughed at!

We see some very peculiar features, for example, where trees have become water logged, and end up sinking to the bottom of the lake, where they sink tens of feet into the still soft lake bed. We see thousands of trees sticking straight up, and some upside down!

We see this exact same geological feature in many different parts of the world, however the cases where the water has dried up, and after effects where successive layers of mud, and silt have hardened, so that an evolution scientist can dig up these trees under many layers - and the conclusion is that this is solid "proof" for evolution - but wait a minute...This is not actually good evidence for evolution at all! How can trees be standing upright, and buried under successive layers, which represent "millions" and "billions" of years?
The trees just kept growing for millions of years, as layer after layer is laid down?

We now know for certain, that this kind of geological anomaly, turns out to actually be excellent evidence for creation, where a global flood can solve an awful lot of geological mysteries. And yet all we hear from evolution scientists, is denial.

The same geological features were witnessed as it actually occurred in Greenland several years back, where another mini Grand Canyon was formed. These examples are exact representations of the Grand Canyon, scaled down, and you would like to think that evolution scientists would be bum-rushing each other in order to be the first to actually study such an amazing geological event in real time!

These examples are very rare geological gifts, and excellent resources to be used as a learning tool. Instead of enthusiastic eagerness to study them, we see denial and a complete lack of interest. This is truly sad - the fact is that evolution scientists don't dare go against the grain.

Imagine what would happen to any evolution scientists who had the gall toactually be after THER TRUTH instead of towing the decaying corpse of evolution on their broken backs? Imagine an evolutionary scientists admitting, at least, that this geographical anomaly actually opens a door, to the idea of quick formation of the Grand Canyon, an after math of a global catastrophic flood for example?

Watch Ben Stein's movie "Expelled" on youtube and you will see what happens to anyone who dares to venture outside of the evolution paradigm.

I can present many more examples from creation science for a young earth if anyone is still interested.

I suspect that most of us are simply grafted into our own private club membership paradigms, and have no vested interest in actually venturing outside our box.

John

 

[aspen]

Personally, my opinion on the Creation Story is that like Psalms, Wisdom literature, and Song of Songs, is inspired but not meant to convey specific, literal events. The focus of Psalms for example, is not oppressing armies and sitting by cool water - it is about David's emotional / spiritual condition and his experience in relationship with God. The Creation story is also inspired but it is not scientific or even specific - the focus should be Gods soverinty, not getting stuck in the mire of mapping out details. No one I know has a problem with this approach when it is applied to Revelation - i tend to believe the creation story like revelation is a mystical account that took 7 days to reveal but that is just an opinion. my larger point is that the approach to interpretation is separate from salvation.

 

[Bronzesnake]

Personally, my opinion on the Creation Story is that like Psalms, Wisdom literature, and Song of Songs, is inspired but not meant to convey specific, literal events. The focus of Psalms for example, is not oppressing armies and sitting by cool water - it is about David's emotional / spiritual condition and his experience in relationship with God. The Creation story is also inspired but it is not scientific or even specific - the focus should be Gods soverinty, not getting stuck in the mire of mapping out details. No one I know has a problem with this approach when it is applied to Revelation - i tend to believe the creation story like revelation is a mystical account that took 7 days to reveal but that is just an opinion. my larger point is that the approach to interpretation is separate from salvation.

Great stuff brother.
I have zero problem with that point of view.

I believe we can understand the scriptures literally by allowing the Bible to interpret itself.
Yes, there are obvious examples of allegory, parable and figurative language, however even where these elements are used, there is always a literal explanation given.
For example - very quickly, I can look at Revelation, with all the figurative language, and I can see where the Bible actually explains the literal meaning in each case.

It's not easy by any means, but once you get the key to understanding the figurative language, you can unlock all other allegory, and figurative language through out the entire Bible.

It would take pages and pages for me to lay out the literal meaning in a way which would be easiest for others to follow, so I'm going to post a link for you, where Chuck Missler does an amazing job explaining the literal understanding of Revelation 17, as a starting point for you.
Click this link - REVELATION 17 LITERAL MEANING

Hope you enjoy this brother. If nothing else, at least you may understand where us "fundie" are coming from.

Take care brother.
John

 

[This Vale Of Tears]

Personally, my opinion on the Creation Story is that like Psalms, Wisdom literature, and Song of Songs, is inspired but not meant to convey specific, literal events. The focus of Psalms for example, is not oppressing armies and sitting by cool water - it is about David's emotional / spiritual condition and his experience in relationship with God. The Creation story is also inspired but it is not scientific or even specific - the focus should be Gods soverinty, not getting stuck in the mire of mapping out details. No one I know has a problem with this approach when it is applied to Revelation - i tend to believe the creation story like revelation is a mystical account that took 7 days to reveal but that is just an opinion. my larger point is that the approach to interpretation is separate from salvation.

I agree that the Creation story is meant to convey general concepts, but those general concepts are iron clad, which is why I believe evolution is categorically excluded as a possible means by which man was created. Man was created as a special act distinct from all other creatures, created in God's own image, and personally God breathed life into man and made him a living being. These concepts are at sharp variance with the evolution narrative and irreconcilably so.

I also disagree with you that YEC's are making a salvation issue out of how people interpret Genesis, an opinion you're stating for the second time. I've been debating with these people for decades and I've never once heard them posit it that way. You might consider the possibility you're incorrect in this assumption.

 

[UppsalaDragby]

My case for what?

Well you seemed to be implying that evidence for the existance of dragons as actual creatures, depicted in both art and literature, was on the same level as "fairies, elves, minotaurs, griffins, and a host of other such creatures". I did what I usually do. Rather than just blurting out what I believe and leaning back on what consensus tells me, I provide some kind of supporting arguments for my beliefs. I'm not saying that they are correct simply because I do that, but at least I make an effort to support them.

All I expect from you is that you do something similar.

 

[aspen]

John thanks for the link. i will take a look at it as soon as i get some time. Vale, i totally agree that the general concepts are true, however i think that it leaves a lot of room for how God chose to create. I am not sold on the idea of evolution but as of now it offers the best explaination for the way creation developed imo - i could be wrong. As far as linking YEC with salvation, i have seen it often and so i tend to make this generalization. it is certainly not true in all cases (John for example), but museums are not built for fun within the culture of conservative evangelicalism - in my experience, there is one purpose, to get people saved. It also goes to heart of solo scriptura apologetics: 1. The Bible is the final authority therefore it must be interpreted literally in the most extreme cases (I have even read on this board that Jesus actually used only examples of people he knew in his parables - seriously). 2. The Creation account is part of scripture. 3. Therefore, people who 'pick and choose' which scriptures are literal and which are not are in fact rejecting the final authority within Christianity and threaten every truth within the Bible including salvation. School boards are afraid of evolution because it is a threat (in their minds) to the faith of their kids.

I know Steven Meyer - he was my philosophy professor. He did not help to start the Discovery Iinstitute on a whim or just to provide an alternative to evolution. He wanted to turn the clock back to a time (within western civ) when philosophy was the foundation of science and in essence 'right the ship' - in his mind, science became secularized because 8hristianity dropped the ball and if we could only pick it up again people would reject it because it is so obviously antichrist. Providing an alternative philosophy (ID) and calling it science is where we would be if his vision of Christian driven science would be without the corruption of secularization - and in his mind, it is where it should be. Unfortunately, our society would still be stuck in the pre-enlightenment era if his vision was reality. it come down the fundamentalist dream of going backwards in the search for a purer time - he just substitutes Christian philosophy for tent revivals

 

[River Jordan]

Theistic evolutionist seem to think the name "fundamentalist" is an insult. I wear that label with pride. YES, I understand the Bible LITERALLY, and that is exactly how God wants it to be.
Some of the most dangerous cults, were successful in drawing seemingly intelligent people into their web, by allegorizing the scriptures. This way, they could control their "flock" and their members could never know what the bible actually means, because they are spoon fed lies, and evil intentions all based on a "leaders" specific understanding of God.
I don't need to give examples, we have all seen the evil and tragic outcomes when this happens.

Of course, I'm not suggesting everyone who is not a fundie, is evil. I'm saying, God would have no justification to judge anyone, based on a Bible full of allegory, because if this were the case, ten people would give ten different meanings to the same scripture. That can only lead to confusion, and also, it opens the door to allow people to live any sinful lifestyle they choose, because hey, when God says adulterers go to Hell. Well, unrepentant adulterers. Just to be clear - It doesn't matter what you may have done, God will forgive and forget the sins, once you come to Jesus with an honest heart of repentance.

But what if I told you that I don't read the Genesis creation accounts as allegorical? To me, the text very clearly indicates that God created by letting things develop naturally. It even says "Then God said, let the earth produce every sort of animal". That's a direct statement that God created by allowing the earth to produce life, which is exactly what I believe.

OK, as for the "best evidence"
There is a major problem which we must address if we hope to prove, or corroborate our personal positions in relation to this topic of creation vs. evolution -

time. When we try to present evidence from the distant past, we very quickly run into brick walls.

Creationists can't present the kind of "proof" that will satisfy evolutionists, or, theistic evolutionists.

Also, evolutionists and theistic evolutionists cannot present "proof" that will satisfy creationists. This is because each side has their heels dug in, and will not be moved unless they see some overwhelming, unattainable evidence, which has to be strong enough to push them back to a place where they can possibly cause themselves to reconsider their dug in positions.

Oh, I could be convinced of young-earth creationism. I can even tell you what evidence would convince me.

In the end, we are forced to admit each side must have "faith" in their beliefs/religions.

I have no more "faith" in evolution than I have "faith" in erosion.

There are zero examples on the planet which shows a series of transitional fossils, where life-form A) eventually becomes life-form

Ok, so let's get specific here and actually look at the data rather than relying on quotes other people have given you from books and articles that you haven't read. I'll let you pick the taxa...two taxa that evolutionary theory says are closely related, and we'll see if there are any fossils specimens that show a transition.

this is not negative brothers. Now you can shed the shackles of evolution, this demonic lie to reduce God's own Words to lies. Now you can fight side by side with Jesus, and you can feel right in your mind that God actually gave us His Word, as He wanted it to be - Literal! What kind of God could create the entire universe, and yet, somehow getting His Word to us exactly as He wanted it to appear, seems impossible, and so we are forced to rely on the science of fallible humans?

So you're not really interested in the data, are you? After all, if you strongly believe that evolution is a "demonic lie" that is specifically crafted to "reduce God's own Words to lies", you're not exactly approaching the subject openly and objectively, are you? You're bringing an extremely strong emotional bias to the table, right?

I can keep this up all day

Oh I'm sure you can. Creationist websites abound with all sorts of mined quotes from actual scientists.

Evolution is a doctrine of demons. I chose to believe my God. I chose to be Fundamentalists, I choose to accept literal language when I see it.

So again, not exactly indicative of someone with whom one can expect an objective discussion, is it?

OK, as for the `dinosaur figurines!
If you choose to be blind to reality, I can't help you.
Do we actually believe that tens of thousands of artifacts dug up in different locations, including underneath a police chief's own house, were "planted" there, in the hopes that they would be dug up, and then what? Whoever made these creations, could never collect any payment from any of them! How come no one noticed what had to be a large operation, with hundreds of helpers: Why didn't any one see loads and loads of wood being imported to keep the kilns going? Are we just prejudiced against these "lying" Mexican people?

Fact - several pieces were sent to be carbon dated. Fact - dates all came back over 2,000 years. Fact - when the labs found out the samples came from dinosaur figurines, they suddenly admitted they were horribly wrong!
Fact - dinosaurs, such as the ones mentioned in the Bible, co-existed with humans.

There are human foot prints on top of dinosaur footprints, which should close the case, except for the extreme denial of those who cannot separate themselves from their true god -the god of man through the power of science! I choose God over science every time!

As if these examples from Mexico weren't proof enough, there are scores of dinosaurs depicted throughout the world!
Too many toist here, so I'll give you a link, so you can see for yourselves.

If you can deny all these, then I suggest to you that you are not interested in THE truth - you are interested in YOUR truth
Click here - ANCIENT DINOSAUR DEPICTIONS

Again, if that's the best you have, it speaks for itself.

I already have. Perhaps you weren't paying attention.

And how'd that go?